• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Were the Nazis Right or Left Wing?

Were the Nazis...

  • Predominantly Right Wing

    Votes: 66 51.2%

  • Predominantly Left Wing

    Votes: 27 20.9%

  • Largely in the center

    Votes: 10 7.8%

  • Don't know/unsure/no opinion/none of the above

    Votes: 26 20.2%
  • Total voters
    129
cpwill said:
the Nazi party platform was built basically (as near as I can read it) on three things:
1. German National Unity
2. Jews are Subhuman
3. Left-wing economics.

excerpts from the Nazi Party Platform circa 1920 admittedly edited to the economic portions to highlight the point under discussion:



Fascism at it's time was a pretty thoroughly left-wing movement. which is why it was originally admired by leftists in other nations (including the US). even the more disgusting aspects (such as eugenics) had their mirrors in the Progressive elements abroad and in the US.
Click to expand...

Not even close. My links demonstrate clearly that it was anything but left-wing. It was closer to right wing, but more of an entitiy onto itself.
 
ElijahGalt said:
First of all, the intentions are irrelevant. Both are totalitarian regimes with corporarist systems. Though the intended ends (you really meant the ends were different, the means were similar) were different, the systems in place were really very similar.

And I don't see the communist leaders of history as protecting the working class.
Click to expand...

You are incorrect. There has never been a communist government/society. The all are, ultimately fascist dictatorships. A TRUE communist society would never operate in the way we have seen.
 
ElijahGalt said:
First of all, the intentions are irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Oh so are we talking about Nazism vs. Communism as an ideology or are we talking about the economic and political structures of both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union? Because AFAIK this thread was about the former and not the latter...
 
rathi said:
Not true. Communists were not corporatist in the slightest. By getting rid of private property, corporations didn't even exist in soviet states. They implemented a command economy where the state is in sole control over all economic resources.
Click to expand...

You don't think the Nazi authorities were in sole control over their nation's economic resources? First, the Nazis issued a 25-Point-Programme in 1920 that explicitely promoted a planned (command) economy. Later, when the Nazis first came to power, the economy was what some historians call, "military Keynesianism." At that time, there was a microscopic sliver of free trade and free association. Once Hitler decided to push forward with war, the economy almost immediately became a planned one.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
You are incorrect. There has never been a communist government/society. The all are, ultimately fascist dictatorships. A TRUE communist society would never operate in the way we have seen.
Click to expand...

A "true" communist society? And what exactly is a "true" communist society? Lenin, the grandfather of 20th century communism, initiated his goals for the construction of a communist society based on the belief that it would take time. He did not yet consider Russia communist and that is why it became known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Lenin advocated small measures of government takeover that would largely work in conjunction with private businesses.

It's easy to claim that communism was more pure than that and therefore no such communist system has ever existed. Well since the Catholic Church has been publicly humiliated with the child scandals, I suppose there's no such thing as Catholicism. Just because every living example of communism has proven to fail and to be cruel, it does not automatically disqualify all systems of being communist.

Nazism was an ideology built on the greatness and protection of the German blood, but when Hitler gave the order to scorch everything and to bomb German cities with German citizens, did that disqualify Hitler as a Nazi?
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Oh so are we talking about Nazism vs. Communism as an ideology or are we talking about the economic and political structures of both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union? Because AFAIK this thread was about the former and not the latter...
Click to expand...

There were very real differences regarding the two, but mostly in the form of symbolism and rhetoric. In terms of actual systems in place, there's little difference.
 
ElijahGalt said:
There were very real differences regarding the two, but mostly in the form of symbolism and rhetoric. In terms of actual systems in place, there's little difference.
Click to expand...

Economically there were similarities, socially, there was a very big difference.
 
spud_meister said:
Economically there were similarities, socially, there was a very big difference.
Click to expand...

Since the basis of this thread has to do with economics and politics, sociology would be irrelevant. Frankly, you would have to qualify that statement before we could proceed.
 
ElijahGalt said:
There were very real differences regarding the two, but mostly in the form of symbolism and rhetoric. In terms of actual systems in place, there's little difference.
Click to expand...

Ah okay so then you're not actually discussing Nazism or Communism and whether or not they're left right but rather the USSR and Nazi Germany thanks for clarifying.
 
You don't think the Nazi authorities were in sole control over their nation's economic resources? First, the Nazis issued a 25-Point-Programme in 1920 that explicitely promoted a planned (command) economy. Later, when the Nazis first came to power, the economy was what some historians call, "military Keynesianism." At that time, there was a microscopic sliver of free trade and free association. Once Hitler decided to push forward with war, the economy almost immediately became a planned one.
Click to expand...

As a libertarian you should understand the concept of private property. In Nazi Germany, the government worked in concert with private owners of industry. In the USSR, private owners don't exist and everything is under the control of the government. That single difference is so large that corporatism is much closer to capitalism by comparison. As an example, the U.S. moved from a capitalist to a corporatist system and back in order to produce munitions to fight WW2. A corporatist system has governments awarding contracts to corporations to produce goods, a communist government owns all land and factories and tells them what to make.
 
As a libertarian you should understand the concept of private property. In Nazi Germany, the government worked in concert with private owners of industry. In the USSR, private owners don't exist and everything is under the control of the government. That single difference is so large that corporatism is much closer to capitalism by comparison. As an example, the U.S. moved from a capitalist to a corporatist system and back in order to produce munitions to fight WW2. A corporatist system has governments awarding contracts to corporations to produce goods, a communist government owns all land and factories and tells them what to make.
Click to expand...

You have to understand libertarian reasoning in order to understand Elijah's position. Private property to them cannot exist outside of a free market, which is the real lynch pin to them. Once the state interferes in the free market to give one organization benefit over the other, or some such thing, then the free market ceases to be. The left/right spectrum to them is defined on state intervention, not the role or status of private property. Based on that, both Nazism (which I interpret as fascism) and Communism are "left wing" because they both require large amounts of state intervention, regardless of what the role/structure of the state itself is or who the system serves.
 
Last edited:
The Nazis viewed the progressive political spectrum as dominated by the Jews. 'Nough said.
 
I would define the far left as the government owning and controlling everything and the far right the total absence of government.

Using those definitions, I would say the NAZIS were left-wing.
 
I would define the far left as the government owning and controlling everything and the far right the total absence of government.
Click to expand...

So you would consider Anarchism to be the most right wing ideology?
 
ElijahGalt said:
A "true" communist society? And what exactly is a "true" communist society? Lenin, the grandfather of 20th century communism, initiated his goals for the construction of a communist society based on the belief that it would take time. He did not yet consider Russia communist and that is why it became known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Lenin advocated small measures of government takeover that would largely work in conjunction with private businesses.

It's easy to claim that communism was more pure than that and therefore no such communist system has ever existed. Well since the Catholic Church has been publicly humiliated with the child scandals, I suppose there's no such thing as Catholicism. Just because every living example of communism has proven to fail and to be cruel, it does not automatically disqualify all systems of being communist.
Click to expand...

In bold. Actually, yes it does. You cannot have a communist society where there is any sort of power structure. It is a stateless society. That's what defines it. There has never been a true communist society. Your example of Catholicism doesn't apply. There is not one clear definition of that belief system, firstly. Secondly, the actions of members of that religion do not define that religion. In a society, if you have a "state" it is not communist. Sorry.

Nazism was an ideology built on the greatness and protection of the German blood, but when Hitler gave the order to scorch everything and to bomb German cities with German citizens, did that disqualify Hitler as a Nazi?
Click to expand...

No it didn't because it continued to meet the goals that he identified.
 
jti said:
I would define the far left as the government owning and controlling everything and the far right the total absence of government.

Using those definitions, I would say the NAZIS were left-wing.
Click to expand...

That may be how YOU define the left, but that is not accurate.
 
jti said:
I would define the far left as the government owning and controlling everything and the far right the total absence of government.

Using those definitions, I would say the NAZIS were left-wing.
Click to expand...

I would define Nazism as being only fictitious, carnivorous marsupials.

using that definition, Nazi's are Drop Bears. :)

(making up your own definition doesn't prove anything, in case you didn't get the gist of my mocking statement)
 
rathi said:
So you would consider Anarchism to be the most right wing ideology?
Click to expand...

Exactly. I am just defining the two extremes of the political spectrum. In America there are very few if any that would espouse either position.

Fascism is a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc.

To define a left versus right political structure where fascism is right wing would require a political spectrum in the form of a circle where the two extremes wrap around and meet either.
 
spud_meister said:
I would define Nazism as being only fictitious, carnivorous marsupials.

using that definition, Nazi's are Drop Bears. :)

(making up your own definition doesn't prove anything, in case you didn't get the gist of my mocking statement)
Click to expand...

It wasn't my definition. I should have said that I ascribe to that definition of the political spectrum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODJfwa9XKZQ
 
SirPwn4lot said:
For an extreme left wing socialist party they sure have a funny way of putting the means of production into the hands of the workers: by creating a corporatist state and crushing all worker opposition.
Click to expand...

What was the difference in the standard of living of the people under Hitler and under Stalin?
 
It was based on supremacism, or the belief that superiority and inferiority are an innate reality between individuals and groups and thus, like conservatism, Nazism rejected the concept of social equality.

That makes Nazism a far right ideology.
 
CriticalThought said:
It was based on supremacism, or the belief that superiority and inferiority are an innate reality between individuals and groups and thus, like conservatism, Nazism rejected the concept of social equality.

That makes Nazism a far right ideology.
Click to expand...

In what way does conservatism reject social equality?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom